Neteller and the Monroe Doctrine: Get out of North America or else

[MiltonFriedman]

Apparently, DOJ has squeezed the cojones of Neteller in return for not prosecuting the company. It really looks to me like the quid pro quo included a GET OUT OF NORTH AMERICA term.

Keep in mind that NONE of the older e-commerce operators were virgins when it came to processing sports betting deposits, apparently a chargeable offense under the Wire Act.

[Mendacious]

In otherwords, the DOJ's primary focus does not appear to be anti-gambling per se, but money laundering/ease of anonymous transference, issues?

[DING-DONG YO]

lol, I was just thinking this exact same thing. Good possibility IMO.

[Phytopath]

So do you actually think the DOJ will back off of Neteller, and leaving North America is party of their Plea?

[adanthar]

you guys (and by this, I mean both here and the zoo) are so clueless about the way politics work, it's hilarious.

are you freaking kidding me? "we won't prosecute you if you leave the Canadian market"? nobody at the DOJ even knows who the Canadian Prime Minister is, much less their stance on gambling. but that's not all..."we'll go easy on you if you, a private company, stop providing services to a country we're allied with where your services are purportedly legal". YES THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE DOJ EXISTS TO DO AND NOT AT ALL AN INTERNATIONAL INCIDENT, GOOD CALL.

answer: they're backing off because somebody somewhere in Canada told them they should do it, and after seeing what happened in the US/given that all of their support offices are in Canada, nobody wants to go through round 2 up north.

[bigt2k4]

living in this country, I can tell you that there is nothing about our federal government that will stop online gambling or prosecute Neteller.

[adanthar]

well, don't look at the Americans, half of us can't find you on a map.

better yet, do ask Pinnacle, who actually *were* pressured by the DOJ to pull out of the US, why nobody in their talks gave a damn about what they did in other countries.

[Skallagrim]

Much as I hate to say it, gotta agree with adanthar here. No one at the FBI or DOJ would see any good reason or possible career advancement in trying to get companies to stop doing business in Canada. They might pressure Canada's government (they do that all the time) but not the companies.

[questions]

[ QUOTE ]
you guys (and by this, I mean both here and the zoo) are so clueless about the way politics work, it's hilarious.

are you freaking kidding me? "we won't prosecute you if you leave the Canadian market"? nobody at the DOJ even knows who the Canadian Prime Minister is, much less their stance on gambling. but that's not all..."we'll go easy on you if you, a private company, stop providing services to a country we're allied with where your services are purportedly legal". YES THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE DOJ EXISTS TO DO AND NOT AT ALL AN INTERNATIONAL INCIDENT, GOOD CALL.

answer: they're backing off because somebody somewhere in Canada told them they should do it, and after seeing what happened in the US/given that all of their support offices are in Canada, nobody wants to go through round 2 up north.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand your point. If Canada is the 51st state as the reich-wing often says, then it stands to reason that HQ is as eager to enforce the Christian agenda THERE as they are at home in the US. On top of that, it doesn't help Neteller in this everything-and-anything-to-fight-terrorism world that shadowy things can happen in a forum where money changes hands.

In weighing the two arguments, I don't think your's are effective at refuting his.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand your point. If Canada is the 51st state as the reich-wing often says, then it stands to reason that HQ is as eager to enforce the Christian agenda THERE as they are at home in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried three times to type something out, then took another look at this sentence and basically said "what's the point"